Thales- the scientific method

Now, since creation evolutionist sor evolutionary creationists claim that evolution absolves God of permitting evil in their quest of defending evil for its own sake,then they rely on John Hick's epistemic distance theory that in order not to override our free will, He had [Yes, something beyond HImself accounts for this!] to appear ambiguous to us as with the picture of the old woman and the young woman in the same place Yet, even with taking Lucifer as metaphorical, why would that have to be? And why not as opposed to all the pointless evil ?Furthermore, morality does not call us to worship Him anyway or have a relationship with Him!
 His wants are irrelevant!
 No, were He the author of evolution, He'd be still guilty of the pointless evils!
 One supernaturalist, finds that this hiddenness presumes that He works hiddenly behind natural  causes, that is, the new Omphalos argument that He so deceives us into thinking that teleonomic processes have no internal power but rather that He controls them per the analysis of Nicolas Malebranche's occasionalism or some related theory that when we hit the eight ball, He actually makes that possible or as Aquinas's sustaining cause that even if the world is eternal, He acts eternally to sustain it,  supernaturalists  ignoring that astrophysics does not sustain that argument.
 Yet, all that is bunk because per the atelic or teleonomic argument that since the weight of evidence precludes any such intent- teleology - wanted outcomes- that then no divine intent guides natural causes and thus would contradict them rather than complement them!
 Thus creation evolution or evolutionary creationism is bunk, an oxymoron.
 Furthermore, not only does this argument eviscerate all teleological arguments but also any that sue intent - no  Grand Miracle Monger, Master Actor in saving Jewry [duh- the Shoah refutes that!] or initiates the Big Bangs.
 And all teleological arguments-- probability, fine-tuning, from reason and design- beg the question of divine intent that we or a comparable species would evolve to worship Him. And each argument has its own other flaws.
  It is ever so irrelevant to produce any probability that life could not have taken its path as randomness intrudes in the form in our case of evolving of the flowering plants that evolved and the cooling off period of Earth's history , mutations and the work of the non-programming, anti-chance agency of Nature called natural selection! The supernaturalists probabilities assume that thus we had to evolve,because He has a plan for us when science says no!
 The fine-tuning one assumes that He makes conditions that we just had to evolve when on the contrary we evolved reflecting those conditions, inversely that is, as Victor Stenger notes.
  Fr. Albert Ewing, Clive Staples Lewis and now that sophisticated solecist of sophistry, Alvin Platinga, avers that were it not for His designing our minds to be warranted truth seekers, when working well in the right conditions. Yet, scientists see no intent when had not an animal not have had a good enough mind ,would have gone extinct.And the fact that that proviso that when functioning well  or faculties  give us truth eviscerates the argument- yes, t'is a self -refuting argument in that it shows no evidence of good design or rather of none. Instruments help us to find the truth that our poor faculties could not.
 We have evidence, Ewing notwithstanding rather than a begged question that selection makes for the truth-seeker. And Charles Robert Darwin could have trusted a monkey's mind to see that that monkey knew how to avoid an enemy eating him.
  And design  in no more that patterns!
 Scientists are ever studying how people see agency when there is no there there. Thus arise the argument from pareidolia that just as people see the pareidolia of Marian apparitions, people see intent- agency- wanted outcomes- and design when there exists only teleonomy- no planned outcomes- and patterns.
 Patterns portray no design any more  than a waterfall reveals divinity per  Francis Collins!
Then some supernaturalists claim that omni-God  could use flourishes to make what we see as imperfections whilst limited God had to use carefully his limited means to produce perfections!
  Thus Thales of Miletus and Strato of Lampascus are right finding that we should adhere to  causalism- natural causes, teleonomy-rather  than    mythological ones that  produce no wanted outcomes for better conditions for us! Faith-healing and exorcisms mean nonsense.That He helps her who helps herself means she uses her own power using the idea of Him as her inspiration, ovelooking her own inner resources! Answered prayer is post hoc- coincidence, and people rationalize poor results.
 All this pareidolia of agency- intent- provides for the animism that sees many spirits to become one great one, just animism at work nevertheless! Monotheism is no advance over polytheism!